Greenland's Big Problem Is a Little One

Though some, (ahem, Obama), wish to use the mankind-caused global warming hoax as a way of growing government and gaining tremendous personal power, others, (ahem, Sarah Palin, tens of millions of citizens and tens of thousands of scientists) and not going along with this scam.

Yes, some ice is melting in the north, but ice is growing in the south. You have the word Science in your magazines' name, so use science and don't just drink the populist kool-aid.

JackK7

First of all Obama will do great things for this country. Second the Antarctic is melting just as fast if not faster than the Arctic. The largest ice shelf broke off of Antarctica a few months ago. Thirdly global warming and climate change exists. The people that say it doesn't also think we should drill off shore and create massive pollution. Fourthly Pop Sci is a very reliable source and (ahem Sarah Palin is not the best person to agree with).

Firstly, this is not a political hot line so please leave that topic alone(I am referring to PopSci as well, whatever your political views are please give the facts and nothing else).

Secondly, yes Global Warming is happing but its not our fault. There is evidence to support that this is a natural cycle and it can and will happen no matter what we do. I am not advocating that we pollute the life out of the earth.

And FYI no matter what the enviermental reasons for not drilling, if we don't drill of shore than China and other countries will and commence selling it to us for twice what it is worth.

Thats my bit.

TheRedFox

TheRedFox: I tend to agree with nearly everything you said, but there is no way to keep politics out of this particular topic. The whole topic of predicting the future climate changes and their causes is beyond our abilities at this time, but that doesn't keep us from pretending we are able to do just that. Whether we think mankind is effecting climate change or not is determined by what is essentially a new religion, and that is why disagreements can get so heated.

Liberals what a big government in their lives. It is there to take away some of the need to make big decisions and take big risks. They want that government to hold their hand and walk through life with them. They want to feel they are a functioning part of this big government movement and that is how they fill their need for companionship and build their self esteem.

The fight against man-made global warming is a natural for liberals. They can be part of the movement by battling their carbon footprint and preaching to others to get smaller cars. They know that government will end up telling them what kind of cars people must drive and how fast they can drive them, and government will say where their thermostats can be set in the winter, and if any air conditioning can be used in the summer. Eventually, the government will decide how many square feet of living space are the maximum per person so that no one hogs resources.

Liberals want global warming to be true because it gives them a strong parental government to take care of them from cradle to grave. It makes them feel wanted, needed and protected.

Conservatives are quite the opposite. They want the government to get out of their life. They have the confidence to provide for themselves. They don't need or want a government to try to give them self esteem - they will provide their own. They don't want the government telling them what to drive or where to set their thermostats.

Conservatives will not put up with a phony global warming crisis giving government the power to completely take over control of their lives.

The whole global warming thing is made up of a lot of politics and very little unbiased science.

Though the commonly-believed cause is still unproven (ahem, PopSci), Greenland's temperature increases and glacial melting are hardly unprecedented. In fact Greenland has been quite a bit warmer even as recently as 50 years ago. Every decade from 1915 to 1965 was at least as warm or warmer than the recent one. The rate of increase in temperature was 50% higher between 1920 and 1930. Back in Eric the Red's day (986 AD), Greenland was more hospitable to farming than today--for 300 years--until it cooled.

The predictions of catastrophic glacier acceleration due to meltwater have been revised based on recent observations that show the feedback cycle is much weaker than thought.

By the way, did anyone notice that the Arctic ice pack is bigger than last year? That over the last five years global temperatures have dropped?

It is fascinating to witness the effects of large-scale regional weather changes with all the scientific instruments at our disposal today. Climate change was going on eons before hominids could even articulate "global warming." I guess for some people it's "chilling" and cause for alarm, but for the rest of us it's just cool.

Adriel - Are you really going to quote NASA? Do you really think they are unbiased? Seriously, been under a rock for the past decade?

Global warming is a joke, certainly the temp has gone up over the past century a percentage of a degree. But nobody can say for certain why this occurred or to what degree if any man influenced nature. What people can point to is the fact that the nature of this planet is change & natural disaster, as with most other planets. The earth, like other planets & stars all go through 'hot' and 'cold' periods. Plus man has been blaming himself for every natural disaster since we lived in caves. Put the two together & you get Adriel. Just two steps away from a cave & still blaming himself (and the rest of us) for the weather.

If you change the chemistry of the atmosphere than of course it is going to alter the balances on Earth. The real question is how bad is it really going to be? We have been much warmer in the past and I don't think a couple of degrees difference is going to send humanity into a tailspin, but of course it is not ideal. As long as we keep our economies strong and keep our eyes on the long term goal of being carbon neutral then we will achieve it. Crippling our economies in a panic about global warming will not bring about change any quicker because we will lack the capital and brain power to make the changes when we need them. I moved from a place with a strong economy that burned a lot of fossil fuels but had the critical mass of engineers, chemists and tradespeople that is required to plan and build new green technologies not to mention the required capital. I now live in a place that is more "eco-friendly" but there are no jobs and no money and as a consequence nobody with the brain power or abilities to make these ideas reality. I'm moving back soon.

WOW! A lot of good comments. I thought when I put down Comment #1, that it would just be followed by strings of insults from people who thought Al Gore was just the smartest scientist to ever live. I'm usually not this happy to be proven wrong.

Just above, the comment from lan1108 circled around a question I have. Just why do we think the earth's present temperature is the ideal? If I were Sarah Palin, or anyone else living in Alaska, I would welcome a little global warming. If I lived in Texas or Florida, I would want the sunspots to stay away long enough to get a little start on one of those mini-ice ages.

I think mankind can adapt to any changes in climate that may come along. If there are going to be great migrations, I wish I knew which direction they were going so I could by some property before they get there.

I see your point about being "ideal". I more think of this climate as ideal simply because it's the one we are best adapted too and the one in which current species are as well. However the Earth is a self regulating system and in this case by the time we approach burning enough fossil fuels to catastrophically alter the climate then Adam Smith economics will push the cost of doing so to astronomical levels. I would prefer more forward thinking policies such as funneling large amounts of money to R&D on alternative energies. Initiatives like the X prize for putting a man in space would be great if they were directed to private companies who for example double the efficiency of solar panels.

Oh and by the way Redfox, I worked in the Alberta oilsands and made a lot of money selling oil to Americans for more than it was worth, thank you, cha ching!

I think we should start walking more and be less dependent on our cars anyway, who's to say a disaster wont come along that prevents alot of us from driving. I dont know about you but i really dont wanna be depending on FEMA

If you want a straight answer on ANY subject, don't ask a politician. They live in a world of make-believe. What I mean by make-believe, is that they try to make you believe in ...whatever. Did you ever hear of "spin"? After you listen to the "spin" doctors, you end-up dizzy, and that is their goal.
Whatever the cause of global warming, the trend is too late to stop. If it is caused by too much C02, we loose, because we can't stop adding more of it to the atmosphere. If stopped immediately, it would bring about a world-wide economic collapse. If it is part of a natural cycle, then civilization will loose again. Major temperature changes in the past happened when there wasn't "civilization" as we know it today. So, what effect it will have, we will have to wait and see, but by then, it will be too late...again. See ya on the dark side of the earth, I mean moon.

It seems Al Gore is not a scientist, he used erroneous information to compile a book and movie about global warming, and our tree hugger friends swallowed it hook line and sinker and sounded the alarm. Al set up a company to handle carbon credits and make millions from people he fooled into believing his B.S. story. The global climate changes have always occurred but we were not always able to monitor them. Now that we can, some of us go off the deep end when a change occurs. The sun has the most influence on our weather, not man kind. We have been cooling for the last 10 years. Back in the 70’s the alarmist tree huggers were blowing the alarms about global cooling, they said we were headed for another ice age. Check out the reports from back then to see for yourself. There have always been gullible people in the world and there always will be, but you do not have to listen to or follow them. In all cases we were talking about less than 1 degree, how dumb do these people think we are. If you change the temperature in your freezer 1 degree will your ice melt? I think not!!

Ok...for those of you touting either side of global warming side...there is a more serious environmental problem caused by our pollution that is easy to detect and nobody is disputing. The amount of particulates in our air, water and soil is significantly higher than it has ever been. These particulates are causing increased rates of cancer, lung disease and heart problems. When diseases are tracked to the cause, our polluted environment is the number 1 cause of disease and death by far. There are even areas in our country (US) and world where it is dangerous to walk outside during certain days of the year due to the amount of pollution in the atmosphere. So even if the earth was going through a cooling cycle and there is no proof to show that man global warming is man made, there is plenty of proof to show that pollution is a BAD IDEA. Either way we need to reduce the amount of greenhouse gases and residential, commercial and industrial by products that are going into our environment.

Well, this is not something that can be simply said. Yes Global Warming is still around, but not as much as they say. Global Warming could be the cause of the glaciers melting, but I doubt it. I'm starting to believe that the weight of the glaciers causes tremendous force, making the glacier break off.

laurenra7 contact me if you get this message

Well, Its called Greenland. It must have not been covered in Ice fairly recently in man's history.

As for people saying its not man's fault, well, we are certainly producing more greenhouse gasses than any other species. We have all these cool gadgets to help.

One question though...If the diminishing ice shelves cause the earth's temp to rise faster because white reflects more heat than the dark oceans, why don't we require all roofs to be white?

That would certainly more than balance things out.

Well your comment about white roofs is 9 months too soon. Obama is trying to get laws passed requiring white or light colored roofs on all buildings. White roofs, light colored roofs and light colored buildings would help reduce electric demand for cooling homes and reduce CO2 released into air. Then next step would be to replace all asphalt covered road with concrete road. Concrete would reduce the heat absorbed by streets that raise temperatures in the city and increase demand for electric to power A/C units.

While requiring solar panels would reduce CO2 release into the air even more than just a white roof, solar panels are expensive and white roofs are cheaper.